It's no secret that traditional and digital agencies are at war over who will lead brand strategy in the future, but the battle heated up in December 2008 when a report published by Forrester Research asserted that "interactive agencies have not yet proven they have the capability to manage brand strategy." This obviously created some controversy online. David Armano of Critical Mass wrote a digital manifesto of sorts, "A Moment of Truth for Digital Agencies", and others, such as Tim Brunelle of Hello Viking, had strong opinions and ideas as well.
I have to say I agree with Forrester, but before you hang me high, let me also say that traditional agencies haven't proven themselves capable of building brands in this new age either.
I know I'm stepping into dangerous territory, but both digital and traditional agencies face challenges when it comes to leading a client's brand strategy.
First, brand strategy should start with a blank slate and neither digital or traditional agencies start there. Both agency business models depend on selling a particular tactic. Digital must sell digital, Traditional must sell print, TV, etc., and the result is a bias that influences each of their recommendations. The truth is, this battle for control isn't really about the brand. It's about controlling as much of the client's budget as possible, with a healthy dose of ego thrown in. Smart clients know this and are looking for new solutions to get around this bias.
Second, brands aren't built by messages, they're built by experiences with people, products, business processes, and, yes, messages. In this regard, digital has an advantage: traditional agencies only create messages, but digital can create messages, execute business processes, offer products (when selling an online service), and connect people. Unfortunately, brand experience occurs offline as well and digital agencies aren't yet able to think or execute beyond the browser.
So who will take charge of the client's brand strategy? Traditional agencies will likely keep control of brand strategy in the short run, for no other reason than they've had control for decades and digital agencies aren't an alternative, yet. But their influence is waning, in large part because traditional agencies haven't adapted well to the new, post-Internet marketing.
In the long run, digital agencies that grow beyond the browser will take the lead. But they could have serious competition from a new type of agency, one designed to be unbiased by foregoing a tactical, executional backend and staff, digital or traditional, that must be supported with recommendations and revenue, an agency focused solely on creating brand, marketing, and communications strategies, one designed to slot in between clients and their ad agency, digital agency, design firm, and all their marketing partners.
But who really knows. Traditional agencies could make a comeback. The down economy and staff layoffs at traditional agencies could work in their favor depending on how they choose to rebuild. But that's for a later post.
